On Thursday 10 April 2008, 12:56, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > This is not sensible. If Uwe says "A blocks B", it means that A is > > getting in the way of B, not the other way around. > > No, that's incorrect. I think you are attaching an incorrect meaning > to the output wording. > > In this case, A's ebuild DEPENDs on !B > > The error output has to come from A's ebuild as that is where the > block comes from, and the standard wording is "A blocks B" as in: A's > ebuild says it cannot be merged if B is already there.
I'm no native speaker, but I'd call whay you describe "B blocks A", not viceversa. > B does not block A as B's ebuild did not know about A when it was > written. B does nto have a problem with A, instead A knows it has a > problem with B. You should read "block" in emerge output as a synonym > for "incompatible with" rather than "gets in the way of" as you appear > to be doing. If the word in emerge output was "block", meaning generically "there is a block, an incompatibility" you would be correct. But that word is "blocks", 3rd person singular, implying a subject and an object, ie something blocks something else. Or, at least that's how I see that, and I may be wrong of course. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
